yelbatinfandomcom-20200214-history
Sandbox5
Ratemall Corporation has an automated employee ratings system. :* "Supervisor" means the person to whom an employee directly reports. :* "Manager" means the person to whom the employee's supervisor directly reports. Employee Recommendations The Web-based form for promotion or award recommendation includes checkboxes for the the supervisor's and the manager's endorsement of the recommendation. If the option "not endorsed" is checked, the supervisor or manager who checked that box must provide a brief explanation in the associated text field. In general, supervisors recommend (and their "endorse" box is automatically checked for their own recommendations), managers endorse, and a corporate Board decides on promotions and awards. However, a recommendation can come also from a person who is not the supervisor. In that case, the recommendation still normally goes to the manager, who will normally obtain the supervisor's decision to endorse or not-endorse before sending it along to the Board. But a manager, or supervisor, or anyone, may choose to send a recommendation to the Board without an endorsement, though that is very rare and unlikely to be successful. To do this, the person submitting the recommendation must check the "not-endorsed" box for the supervisor and/or manager and must provide an explanation as to why the recommendation is being submitted without a normal endorsement. The "endorsed" box can only be checked only by the authorized person (by the supervisor or by the manager), and will be digitally signed. But the "not endorsed" box, which will also be digitally signed, can be checked by anyone. Again, normally, the supervisor or the manager is the one who checks this box and provides the required explanation. He/she then sends the recommendation "up" if endorsed (up to the manager or up to the Board) or "back" if not endorsed (back to the person from whom the recommendation came). If a not-endorsed recommendation "comes back," the originator can still decide to forward it to the Board, so long as the not-endorsed box(es) have been checked and digitally signed, and so long as explanations have been provided. Automated Rating System (ARS) To be promoted or awarded, an employee must be eligible and suitable. The Board decides suitability based on recommendations and the Automated Ratings System, hereafter referred to as the ARS. It is important to remember that the ARS, alone, does not determine an employee's suitability. The ARS is only one factor considered by the Board. The Board will also look at the recommendations and endorsements, and may also consider other factors such as the budget. Once the Board decides that a recommended employee is suitable, a promotion or award may be granted. The ARS, however, does determine eligibility. The system will not allow recommendations for employees who are not eligible. Good Standing To be eligible for promotion or award, an employee must be in good standing within the ARS for 3 consecutive months. To be in good standing, the employee must have received credit for rating a certain number of other employees during each calendar month since the employee entered into the system. At the beginning of every month, the ARS provides the employee with a short list of employees to be rated that month, and the employee must rate all of them by the end of the month to remain eligible for promotion or award. If, at the end of the month, an employee has not done so, the ARS will require that more be rated during the next month, and the employee will regain eligibility when the deficit is made up. If, over the span of 3 months, an employee has not made up a deficit, the employee will be permanently ineligible for award or promotion but may petition the Board to re-enter the system. If the Board agrees, the deficit is removed and the employee regains eligibility after achieving 3 consecutive months of good standing. If the Board does not agree, the employee will never be eligible for award or promotion, and may want to consider retiring or seeking employment elsewhere. There is no other consequence for non-participation. An employee who is content to receive no awards may continue working at his/her present grade without ever participating in the ARS. Monthly Rating Requirement Each month the ARS selects names from a list of employees that the employee is eligible to rate or required to rate. The "core list" contains the names of those that the employee is required to rate. The core list will never be fewer than five. To augment the core list, the ARS selects and regularly adjusts an "extended list" based on a number of factors including analysis of email patterns and the system's requirements for statistical validity. For these additional names on the extended list, the employee has the option to record "no opinion" for any of the questions posed. The list presented at the beginning of the month will contain just five names, selected by the ARS from the core list. However, every time a rating is submitted for one of the five, the employee is asked to rate another person selected by the ARS from the extended list, such that 10 responses will be submitted by the employee every month, five from his/her core list, and five selected by the ARS. Creating the Core List The supervisor and the employee must agree on a list of no fewer than five. These names can be changed at any time, so long as the supervisor and the employee agree, but must at all times include the supervisor, the supervisor's other direct subordinates (those that have regular contact with the employee), and the employee's own immediate subordinates if the employee is a supervisor. If that number is fewer than five, the supervisor and employee will need to select others with whom the employee has regular professional contact in order to make up the difference. (The manager can and should be included if the manager has regular professional contact with the employee.) For convenience, the ARS provides the supervisor and the employee with a list of names to choose from, beginning with the supervisor and the direct subordinates, and including also the names of others with whom the employee may have the most regular contact based on email aliases and exchanges. A global list of all other employees is also available. The supervisor's name and the names of the supervisor's and employee's direct subordinates are automatically check-marked. This is the starting list. The supervisor or employee only need to select additional names if the number is fewer than five. If the supervisor checks or un-checks a name, a new proposed list is submitted to the employee for approval, and if the employee checks or un-checks a name, a new proposed list is submitted to the supervisor for approval. This continues until a list proposed by one of them is approved by the other without changes. At any time, the supervisor or the employee can go back into the list and make whatever changes seem desirable or necessary (as when someone on the list changes jobs), but these changes will similarly require the other's approval before taking effect. If unchanged, the core list must be re-approved by both at least once per year. Ratings Only five questions, also called rating factors, must be addressed to submit a rating. For each factor, an additional response option of "no opinion" is available when rating a person who is not on the employee's core list. ARS Report For every employee in good standing, the ARS generates and continually updates a 3-part report that is based on all the ratings submitted by all employees. This report is hidden until and unless it is deemed by the ARS to be "valid," and then it is made available only to authorized viewers. To deem a report as valid, the ARS requires that ratings by 10-or-more credible others (see Credibility Assessment, below) for at least three rating factors (including Trustworthiness) reflect a consensus of opinion. The five questions are referred to as the rating factors. A consensus is achieved when the standard deviationStandard deviation is a statistical measure of how widely or narrowly a range of values spreads from the mean (average) value. A small standard deviation indicates that the values are grouped tightly around the mean. A large standard deviation indicates that the values are spread out more evenly across the range of possible values. of the ratings for a factor is less than one. If there is consensus on some of the rating factors but no consensus on others, the ARS generates a partial report that identifies which factors are being excluded, and why. If there is no consensus on Trustworthiness or no consensus on three of the rating factors, the report is deemed not valid and remains inaccessible. Only the employee and the immediate supervisor have continuous access to a valid report, for performance improvement purposes. The members of the Board also have access to the report, but only when the Board has received a recommendation for promotion or award. The Board loses access after a determination is made. The employee may, from time to time, grant temporary access to this report to other persons, and should normally do so when applying for a new assignment or when recommended for a new assignment. A prospective new supervisor, or a manager deciding on a assignment, will typically request access to the report. Part I: Credibility Assessment The report begins with an assessment of how well or poorly the employee has rated other employees. This is based on a statistical analysis of the ratings submitted by the employee in comparison with the ratings of the same persons by other employees, as well as with the ARS credibility assessments of all employees. If, for a given person and a given factor, the rating submitted by the employee differs from the mean rating by more than one and by more than the standard deviation, that rating is flagged as "questionable." In other words, if a rating is outside the range of the standard deviation but is still only "off" by one (e.g., below average versus average), it is nonetheless accepted as at least "credible." If a rating if "off" by more than one but is still within the range of the standard deviation, that rating, too, is still accepted as credible. The only ratings flagged as questionable are those that differ from the average rating by more than one and that lie outside the range of the standard deviation. Individual flags are not revealed in the report. Instead, the system looks at the ratio of "questionable" to "credible" ratings and compares it with the system-wide average. * If the employee has a ratio that is high to a statistically significant degree, the report says, "Less than credible. This employee has submitted a significantly high number of ratings there are deemed not credible." * If the employee has a ratio that does not differ from the corporate average in a statistically significant way, the ARS reports that the employee's participation in the system has been "Credible." * If the employee has a ratio that is low to a statistically significant degree, the assessment shown in the report is, "Exceptionally credible." Part II: How the Employee was Rated by Others The report next shows, for each of the five factors, one of three possible assessments of the employee based on how he was rated by others: # Not Above Average # Superior; or, # Exceptional (among the very best). This is based on the mean rating, excluding the ratings that were outside the range of the standard deviation and that came from employees whose other ratings (of this individual and/or of other individuals for this factor) have been less than credible. The employee can see from these assessments the particular areas, if any, in which improvement may be needed in how he/she is perceived by others. This section also identifies the "percentile group" in which the employee falls compared to all other employees. The employee is awarded points on a scale of 0 to 4 for each factor, with 0 awarded for a rating of "among the worst" and 4 awarded for a rating of "the best." These numbers are added to determine a score, which is then compared to the scores for all other employees. The percentile groups for this score are: * Excellent (in the top 10% of all employees) * Superior (better than 60% of all employees) * Acceptable This final rating is the one used in Part III Part III: The ARS Recommendation The report concludes by ranking the employee on a scale of 1 to 4 and then giving the corresponding final assessment. # Eligible to be considered for an award, a promotion or a more challenging assignment. # Worthy of consideration for an award, a promotion or a more challenging assignment. # Recommended for award, promotion, or a more challenging assignment. # Strongly recommended for award, promotion, or a more challenging assignment. To arrive at this final statement, points are awarded for the ARS credibility assessment from Part I and for the overall rank achieved in Part II, and then simple addition produces the result. As shown, every employee who is in good standing within the ARS is at least eligible to be considered for an award, a promotion or a challenging assignment. To be deemed worthy of consideration, however, an average employee must have participated in the ARS in a credible manner. Every superior employee will automatically be recommended, unless his/her participation has been less than credible. And, likewise, every "best" employee will be strongly recommended if the employee has performed credibly within the system.